babington on the "associated press." john dickerson of "slate" magazine, peter baker of the "new york times," and amy walter from "the cook political report." >> live from our nation's capital, this is "washington week" with gwen ifill. corporate funding for "washington week" is provided by -- >> this rock has never stood still. since 1875 we've been there for our clients through good times and bad. when their needs changed, we were there to meet them. through the years from insurance to investment management from real estate to retirement solutions, we've developed new ideas for the financial challenges ahead. this rock has never stood still. and that's one thing that will never change, prudential.

additional corporate funding for "washington week" is provided by boeing. additional funding is provided by the annenburg foundation, the corporation for public broadcasting and by contributions through your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. once again live from washington, moderator gwen ifill. gwen: good evening. monday will mark the 71st time we've sworn a president into office in this country. we don't usually remember inaugural speeches but we do recall the day with its pomp, ceremony and its political cease fire. the atmospherics are likely to have all three. but there is no small measure of bad blood flowing just beneath the surface. the disagreement on foreign and domestic policy is both deep and real. the white house used this week to foreshadow coming debates over guns an butter. >> if there's even one thing we

can do to reduce this violence, if there's even one life that can be saved, then we've got an obligation to try it. republicans in congress have two choices here. they can act responsibly and pay america's bills or they can act irresponsibly and put america through another economic crisis. gwen: so the sque why are all these gauntlets being thrown down even inauguration? >> it's the best time do it. he's now at the apex of his presidency. it will never get any sweeter -- gwen: it doesn't get better than this? >> he is already a lame duck. he's gun his second election. we've already talked about people will succeed him. by his own calculation he's got 16 months to make it his mark. he has to come out of the box,

fast and energetic. he's coming out on guns, immigration, fiscal policy. he needs to push the other side defering to his judgment while he has the opportunity to do it. >> if you agree, chuck that he has left radge that he may never have again, let's just talk about the gun part of this. does he have the leverage to get all of these plans he came up with, far more specific thing than people suspected through this congress. >> because of the tragedy in connecticut this was an issue that suddenly had to be pushed through front burner unlike things like fiscal policy and immigration. and i think the answer to your question is we'll have to wait and see but there's a lot of doubters including in congress with the big things like the assault weapons ban. it's lost probably so much support that that probably won't happen. he might be able to get the university background check. that seems fairly fairly popular.

maybe the stiffer penalties for trafficking guns. but this is an issue that his own party, the democrats are not as united on as they are on some other issues. gwen: who are his biggest friends, his enemies? the n.r.a., they brought his children into the debate. >> this is in a video, the n.r.a. put on their website. this was going to basically enrage their members. this was not an effort by the n.r.a. to bring moderate people into the argument on their side. i think the -- the republicans have basically been very cool -- cruel to the president, out right hostile. john boehner said they'll take up these measures one by one. the senate is going to go in a piecemeal fashion. what interests me is the senate on the gun and on the second term agenda.

harry reid said about 10 of the 23 democrats may have a real problem with this gun control agenda. maybe the number's a little bit shorter than that. but you're talking about democrats in states likele north carolina, arkansas, alaska, colorado, who will have trouble supporting the president on a whole host of these issues. it's one thing for the president to demonize the republicans and he's doing that and he's taking on a much more confrontational approach. but what happens when moderate democrats where they have to rely on some republican leaning type voters balk at the president's proposals? that changes the politics very quickly for him. gwen: but i'm curious where americans are. one of the things that i saw in his proposal is that the center for disease control should not be banned by investigating gun violence. who knew that they were? >> i don't think anybody did. but it goes to the point of guns

the legislative piece but we're also looking at the facthat this is a cultural issue. we're here in washington debating can they get this piece through? can they get that piece through? but when you're talking about guns you're talking about a way of life. when people here tell you you don't need guns really that's another way for these sort of elite -- the language they use in that n.r.a. ad, exactly. you guys, you set these laws based on the world you live in. why don't you come into the world that we live in? gwen: peter, you wrote about it. our language is so influenced with gun references that we can't get around it. you take aim at something or you take a shot at somebody tfment vice president has even used it it.

>> oh, the vice president says i'm shooting for tuesday. >> and there's no silver bullet. >> i do it. i don't pretend that we don't. we all kind of find ourselves -- use the vernacular of guns because it's part of our culture. it's part of our public mythology. that describes a little bit of what you're talking about there's a vast part of the country between the coast that identify with a way of life whether it's factual or not and some people would argue that or not is something that flavors the debate. >> and i think the president was trying by having thatent when he announced those proposals written in the wake of newtown that what the president's trying to do with the white house is change think from a debate about elites tell us what to do ant our god-given rights into a conversation about children. >> he specifically said there's

a right to life. there's a right to living happy. he's trying to pit two different ideas -- >> but the gun rights activists are trying to turn it into an argument about hypocrisy. those people taking something from you. >> and the use of children, by the way to the people on the gun side are as objectionable about the ad that they put out because it's an emotional blackmail they would say to use children like that who, you know -- gwen: wrote letters to the president. >> you talked about how do people feel? there's a fair support. but the gun rights groups led by the n.r.a. so many years has been so intense. >> not even for background check. if years they outmaneuver more placid minority. whether this will change that, we'll see. but i have my doubts.

>> the president had his final press conference of his first term. when he came -- what he came to talk about was the debt ceiling. he said we should not be a deadbeat nation. that was the quote of the day. so what was the point of making that, the subject of this final fight? >> well because he knows that republicans wants to make this the center piece of their fight for the next couple of weeks which is you use this debt ceiling vote to gain some leverage because when you're in the minority, you've got nothing but threat. to use this dead ceiling fight wlosht we're going to pay our bills as a way to have spending cuts. the republican house are backing away from that saying, fine, we're going to extend this debt ceiling. we're going to pass something for a short period of time but

in the interim we better get sot cuts. >> you're talking about what the house republicans put out today. isn't -- i hate to use the term -- kicking the can down the road. isn't this just taking us back to where we were before, delaying the inevitable? >> yes, but it's not just about the debt ceiling. this is one of the reasons the inauguration comes at such a dreary times. we just had this boring fight. >> i thought it was exciting . >> that's not exciting lemplet -- that's not exciting. >> he clearly has a different idea of exciting. >> there was a fight about the sequester and the regular roll budget.

the debt ceiling is one where real ugly consequences were likely to happen. an they were likely to get blamed. they want to move that to the last of fights. . it's still going to be the same fight over how do you distribute resources in the time of scarcity? >> president obama stared them down on this. he said i'm not going to negotiate. a i'm not going -- this is a separate thing unnegotiateable. they said we're decoupling it from the immediate to other showdowns coming up. >> yeah, and here's the one opportunity, i think the republicans want to say, ok, the fight has been internal for republicans. fine, democrats. let's see what you do on entitlement. let's go. you keep putting it on the table. >> is he coming back to leverage? >> because of some of the points that have been made here and the

concession that we think the republicans made today, there is leverage on the part of the president in terms of the letting this debt ceiling deadline go past it. john's right. the community cares about that. and that's a problem with the republicans. keep in mind, the republicans brought up this idea. they still haven't gotten it through the house. we'll get a variation. for one thing if the democrats don't help them without the votes and there was some other aspects that the democrats didn't like. john boehner the speaker will have a hard time doing that. they each have leverage over each other. it almost has to have some kind of democratic support. gwen: does everybody find it interesting that the conversation is about the house and not senate?

>> the senate doesn't want to go forward on that the house is not even going to vote on. if you're a democratic senator and you're being asked to vote on painful cuts, why would you take that vote if it doesn't come to a floor -- to the floor? >> working it hard enough can get his or her members onboard. there are so many conservatives that speaker boehner has very little leverage on them because one -- excuse me allowing the extension for three months is go and say, senate democrats you come up with the budget. you haven't done it for four years. you keep kicking the can down the road. you do your job and we'll get

back to the limb. they want democrats to pony up and put real numbers in place about entitlements and about what they believe. >> which of course, they won't do. democrats won't feel intimidated. oh, ok. >> what's this idea if you don't do your job you won't get paid. i wonder if that's something that's going to resonate. >> they have to stick it in an escrow. they have to hold it. it's a way of saying we're not in fact, caving in on this. >> those folks who were elected on in 2010 that class that brought republicans to power. they were elected on spending. this is what they came to washington to do. they've been trying to do this since 2011 and by god they're not going to leave until they get something.

>> let's look forward because four years ago the president feels he was sent to washington to do the very specific setup things. now it's trying to find a way as the president's willing in his second term of office and to do other things he didn't feel -- he had in the room to do. i thought we would go back and listen to just what president obama had to say four years ago when he took that first oath of office. >> on this day, we gather because we have chones hope over people. unity of purpose over conflict and discord. on this day, we come to proclaim an end to the petty grevranses, the false promises and worn out mass that have far too long have sprang led our politics. we remain a young nation. but in the words of scripture, the time has come to set aside

childish things. >> ok. this is where the approach ear's daughter speaks up about the childish thing like. four years later eddie: you feel like they were put away? >> it's all gone. every president envisions a hope or a vision that's more aspirational than realistic but to compare, i think he is a sbessment. he will probably not suggest there is unity and purpose this time around. >> because there's just not. and if you read the other second inaugural address. they all tried to some mon -- summon this. that's the example we've had leading up to the inauguration and the example we will have

afterwards. george w. bush even holding the liberty bell. but he although george bush was a divisive president in his second term, he talked about the international ball which is in retrispect which is spreading freedom in the midded east. but at least he had a big grand national cause that he could call the nation 2r50. how this president speaks to coming mon purpose -- >> i think this was a pupil that came out the other day. said, this coming year do you think that republicans and democrats will work together to solve problems? they could come together. today it's 23%. gwen: they were paying attention. >> there's -- those are hopeless romantics. >> they are. i give them credit for this.

>> you ask conservative republicans do you think that elected officials should compromise or stick to their principles? >> 60% said stick to pinspls. 60% -- says compromise. >> what are -- assuming that the 23% are right, what are the second term priorities the president is now. -- it's not a state of the union speech. but he's going to lay out the broad swath. >> what thing and we mentioned some of them are fairly recent events an -- and happenings. it was a back burner issue until that hand. so that's what heaped that up. immigration used to be talked

about a lot. and then just went nowhere. it became an issue that neither party wanted to talk about. well, what's happened in the 2008, republicans really got clobbered by the mispanic vote which continues to grow. the immigration issue isn't the only issue but it's a big issue. and republicans at least those who care about presidential elections realize they've got to do something. so now there's an incentive for republicans to get onboard. so those are two events help give energy to those two. >> if there is any complaint that obama supporters have had the last four years as if the president hasn't been hard enough, so is this the opportunity? >> those things appear to be going. >> he's what will be interesting sheer to see whether the president exploits weaknessst in

the republican party. he certainly did it in the primary where is basically he took the most extreme position on immigration which is what mitt romney had hit. and mitt romney did poorly with hit panics. he's trying to figure out they no longer can rely the votes of white men. so so there's a conflict. che get republicans at each other. he certainly has already on these fiscalish issues. so does that creates some opportunities for him. are there republicans who are going to say, maybe we need to as a party change and maybe kind of come to some kind of an agreement. the campaign organize and turning it into a grass roots

priorities type let's see -- >> 10 1. >> i knew that. >> i'm a little bit skeptical about this. i'm trying to hear about this actual group as they come together, the new >> organizing for action. >> even though the o is -- a lot of people think it's the o as for obama. >> this supporter, these lists all this act assists have no long ear campaign. they're giving them to agenda. these are the kind of people who live in the districts that the president has already won. what would be more effective is to try to figure out how do we

do this? >> they try angling -- and to john's point this is a question for the president and i've had a blun -- does he want to spend his time worrying about mill legacy. now i'm going spend the next four cements the my legacy. or does he use it as an opportunity to point out, you knoll real yes cement the coalition. what's interesting with his mat, this week about their capacity to ever agree him baisley on anything. he's three row. you could imagine he's reaching out to the other side. this is written about -- gwen: he only has a second room before he goes, where are we

are. >> we have a year 1/2 to push immigration, gun control things that will add to his legacy. he's got to focus on ample money. he has to make this economy better. if it's not better by the time he leaveses office he will not be viewed as 2 guest. the tea party did not exist by name and we have to remember that things have happened. the 2009 health care. in 2010 you had a huge republican wind. that changed dramatically. gwen: thank you all very much and thank you to all of you as well. we've got to go as well but the conversation continues online on the "washington week" website extra where you'll be able to find us talking about all at in. four complete coverage of the second inauguration of president

barack obama. join me at 11:00 a.m. eastern time. i'll answer your questions about that and more in my monthly website. that what a busy week. you can send your questions in advance to "washington week" at pbs.org. and we'll see you next week. good night. >> corporate funding for "washington week" is provided by --

>> additional corporate funding for "washington week" is provided by prudential, additional funding is provided by the contributions from viewers like you. thank you.

the following kqed production was produced in high definition. ♪

♪ ♪ every single bite needed to be great. >> twinkies in there. >> wow! >> it's like a great, big hug in the whole city. >> that food is about all i can handle. my parents put chili powder in my baby food. >> french fries everywhere, all over the table and just a lot of chili.